Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 12 Mar 2021 13:55:31 +0800
From:   Aili Yao <yaoaili@kingsoft.com>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
CC:     "HORIGUCHI =?UTF-8?B?TkFPWUE=?=(=?UTF-8?B?5aCA5Y+j44CA55u05Lmf?=)" 
        <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
        "david@redhat.com" <david@redhat.com>,
        "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "yangfeng1@kingsoft.com" <yangfeng1@kingsoft.com>,
        <yaoaili@kingsoft.com>, <sunhao2@kingsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,hwpoison: return -EBUSY when page already poisoned
Message-ID: <20210312135531.72e33b35@alex-virtual-machine>
In-Reply-To: <db80e98d2b264e988596d0d7d7c8a776@intel.com>
References: <20210303115710.2e9f8e23@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210303163912.3d508e0f@alex-virtual-machine>
        <1a78e9abdc134e35a5efcbf6b2fd2263@intel.com>
        <20210304101653.546a9da1@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210304121941.667047c3@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210304144524.795872d7@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210304235720.GA215567@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>
        <20210305093016.40c87375@alex-virtual-machine>
        <aee5176eafb54c88b19a5b2671d0a1fc@intel.com>
        <20210310141042.4db9ea29@alex-virtual-machine>
        <20210311085529.GA22268@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
        <db80e98d2b264e988596d0d7d7c8a776@intel.com>
Organization: kingsoft
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 17:05:53 +0000
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:

> > I guess that p->mce_vaddr stores the virtual address of the error here.
> > If so, sending SIGBUS with the address looks enough as we do now, so why
> > do you walk page table to find the error virtual address?  
> 
> p->mce_vaddr only has the virtual address for the COPYIN case. In that code
> path we decode the kernel instruction that hit the fault in order to find the virtual
> address. That's easy because:
> 
> 1) The kernel RIP is known to be good (can't page fault etc. on kernel address).
> 2) There are only a half dozen instructions used by the kernel for get_user() or
>      copy_from_user().
> 
> When the machine check happens during user execution accessing poison data
> we only have the physical address (from MCi_ADDR).
> 
> -Tony

Sorry to interrupt as I am really confused here:
If it's a copyin case, has the page been mapped for the current process?
will memory_failure() find it and unmap it? if succeed, then the current will be
signaled with correct vaddr and shift?

Maybe the mce_vaddr is set correctly, but we may lost the correct page shift?

And for copyin case, we don't need to call set_mce_nospec()?

-- 
Thanks!
Aili Yao